Author Guidelines

1. Terms of Submission

Papers submitted to Clausius Scientific Press (CSP) must contain original material. The submitted paper, or any translation of it, must neither be published, nor be submitted for publication elsewhere. Violations of these rules will normally result in an immediate rejection of the submission without further review.

The manuscript has a fixed format which contains a title page, abstract and keywords. The title page must have a title that reflects the summary of the article. It must also contain the name of the authors and also their contact details and affiliations. The abstract must be approximately 300 words and should be the objective of the article and must not have any abbreviations and references. Keywords containing 4 to 10 words for indexing purpose must be provided.

CSP's journals usually welcome the following types of contributions:

New articles: These articles must have completely new research that proves to be a major contribution to the field of science. The subject area dealt with in the article should not have been published before. Substantial evidences backing the research work, findings and methodology can be present.

Research articles: They must also contain fresh research works.

Case reports: They may contain a detailed synopsis of diseases, their causes, occurrences in major parts of the world etc.

Various other forms of articles include mini-reviews, commentaries, Debates, editorials, hypotheses and software articles, etc.

All manuscripts and any supplementary material should be submitted via CSP's Paper Submission System or to respective journal email address.

2. Plagiarism Policy

Respecting intellectual property rights is a foundational principle of the CSP's Codes of Ethics. Plagiarism, in which one misrepresents ideas, words, computer codes or other creative expression as one's own, is a clear violation of such ethical principles. Plagiarism can also represent a violation of copyright law, punishable by statute. Plagiarism manifests itself in a variety of forms, including

Copying elements of another author's paper, such as equations or illustrations that are not common knowledge, or copying or purposely paraphrasing sentences without citing the source;

Verbatim copying of portions of another author's paper with citing but not clearly differentiating what text has been copied (e.g., not applying quotation marks correctly) and/or not citing the source correctly.

Self-plagiarism is a related issue. In this document we define self-plagiarism as the verbatim or near-verbatim reuse of significant portions of one's own copyrighted work without citing the original source. Note that self-plagiarism does not apply to publications based on the author's own previously copyrighted work (e.g., appearing in a conference proceedings) where an explicit reference is made to the prior publication. Such reuse does not require quotation marks to delineate the reused text but does require that the source be cited.

Plagiarism can be said to have clearly occurred when large chunks of text have been cut-and-pasted. Such manuscripts would not be considered for publication in CSP journals. Plagiarism in any form, at any level, is unacceptable and is considered a serious breach of professional conduct, with potentially severe ethical and legal consequences. All authors are deemed to be individually and collectively responsible for the content of papers published by CSP.

3. Peer Review Process

Peer review is the major quality maintenance measure for any academic journal. In this process, experts in the relevant fields analyze the scholarly work from every perspective, including its writing, the accuracy of its technical content, its documentation, and its impact on and significance to the discipline.

Reviewers play a pivotal role in scholarly publishing, and their valuable opinions certify the quality of the article under consideration. Peer review helps to ratify research, establishing a standard for evaluation within research communities.

Firstly, after a paper is submitted to a journal, a journal editor screens the manuscript and decides whether or not to send it for full peer review. Only after clearing the initial screening is the manuscript sent to two peer reviewers. Finally, journal editors or the journal’s editorial board consider the peer reviewers’ reports and make the final decision to accept or reject the manuscript for publication. The Generic Peer Review Process visualizes this.

4. Publication Ethics Statement

The publication of an article in a peer-reviewed journal is an essential building block in the development of a coherent and respected network of knowledge. It is a direct reflection of the quality of the work of the authors and the institutions that support them. Peer-reviewed articles support and embody the scientific method. It is therefore important to agree upon standards of expected ethical behavior for all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer, the publisher and the society of society-owned or sponsored journals.

Please see here for the publication ethics and malpractice statement. CSP adheres to (COPE). Please click here for the code of conduct statement we apply (COPE).

Authors should be aware of a possible Conflict of Interest. In such a case authors can still take responsibility for the accuracy of their paper, but must inform the reader with an appropriate statement in the Acknowledgements.

5. Copyright

CSP adheres to the principles of Creative Commons Attribution license, meaning that we do not claim copyright of the work we publish. We only ask people using one of our publications to respect the integrity of the work and to refer to the original location, title and author(s).

6. Retraction Policy

CSP recognizes the importance of the integrity and completeness of the scholarly record to researchers and librarians and attaches the highest importance to maintaining trust in the authority of its electronic archive. However, circumstances may arise where a paper got published based on misconduct or honest error. Editors certainly guide the review process with much care, but it remains notoriously difficult to detect all occurrences of misconduct or error. For this reason it may become necessary to correct the scholarly record. The decision to alter the record should not be taken lightly. Action taken depends on the individual case and can take the form of

Expression of Concern

Correction (Erratum or Corrigendum)

Retraction

Removal

The responsibility of guiding an investigation of misconduct or honest error is with the editor of the journal concerned. Authors and reviewers will take part in the investigation. The editor will decide on the form to best correct the scholarly record. Guiding principles are COPE's Retraction Guidelines and other accepted scholarly principles.

Minor errors that do not affect the integrity of the metadata or a reader's ability to understand an article and that do not involve a scientific error or omission are corrected such that the original article is replaced with the corrected version.

If final action originates from an author's request, CSP will help to process it without extra charges. If the measures taken (e.g. a retraction) were not initiated by the author(s) or are even taken without mutual agreement, the author(s) will not be financially compensated and Article Processing Charges will not be reimbursed.